I hope so.Long Con wrote:Yay for no death! Perhaps the Doctor protected the right person?
Why Llama, Metalmarsh?
But in case the nightkill was missed, llama was not really around.
I hope so.Long Con wrote:Yay for no death! Perhaps the Doctor protected the right person?
Why Llama, Metalmarsh?
Dragon D. Luffy wrote: ↑Wed Dec 16, 2020 7:33 pm Just how many days of "let's yeet them tomorrow" can a mafioso survive?
The answer: all of them, if you are a marmot.
Dragon D. Luffy wrote: ↑Wed Dec 16, 2020 7:33 pm Just how many days of "let's yeet them tomorrow" can a mafioso survive?
The answer: all of them, if you are a marmot.
Dragon D. Luffy wrote: ↑Wed Dec 16, 2020 7:33 pm Just how many days of "let's yeet them tomorrow" can a mafioso survive?
The answer: all of them, if you are a marmot.
Then perhaps you can blurt out fake thoughts on another player and see how people respond. :PLong Con wrote:Well, the thing is, when you're trying to catch the bad guys, it really hinders the strategy when you blurt all your thoughts into the thread right away so that they can read and adapt to what you say. I don't want my suspects taking my thoughts into account when they are posting, because then they could post with the right kind of foreknowledge, saying the things that I so generously supplied the means to say that will make me not suspect them.
Like, I could say "I'm suspicious of the player who goes after Llama today"... and if I said that before you had posted, then maybe you, as a hypothetical baddie, would have posted something different than you did, and my suspicion would be cut off at its base.
I hope this helps you understand why I, in this game and future games, might be inclined to hold back thoughts I have from the thread.
Dragon D. Luffy wrote: ↑Wed Dec 16, 2020 7:33 pm Just how many days of "let's yeet them tomorrow" can a mafioso survive?
The answer: all of them, if you are a marmot.
That is another strategy that I will likely employ at some point. Right now, though, I just want to wait until someone other than Metalmarsh or Long Con has posted.Metalmarsh89 wrote:Then perhaps you can blurt out fake thoughts on another player and see how people respond. :PLong Con wrote:Well, the thing is, when you're trying to catch the bad guys, it really hinders the strategy when you blurt all your thoughts into the thread right away so that they can read and adapt to what you say. I don't want my suspects taking my thoughts into account when they are posting, because then they could post with the right kind of foreknowledge, saying the things that I so generously supplied the means to say that will make me not suspect them.
Like, I could say "I'm suspicious of the player who goes after Llama today"... and if I said that before you had posted, then maybe you, as a hypothetical baddie, would have posted something different than you did, and my suspicion would be cut off at its base.
I hope this helps you understand why I, in this game and future games, might be inclined to hold back thoughts I have from the thread.
While that's certainly possible, I think the odds are better that the doctor did some saving. Because even if llama were gone all day (and he wasn't the only one...) there's still another baddie that can probably put in the kill. So I'd readily discount that missed kill theory entirely, unless the wet bandits are llama and DFaraday.Metalmarsh89 wrote:I hope so.Long Con wrote:Yay for no death! Perhaps the Doctor protected the right person?
Why Llama, Metalmarsh?
But in case the nightkill was missed, llama was not really around.
The hard part about withholding thoughts, like MM said, is that if the game is already dragging, we don't have any info to go on. Yes, we want to hear from everyone else, but if no one speaks up, it's like an American waiting for another car at a roundabout: "you go ahead" "no, you go" "no, I insist" "I don't understand the driving laws and how they operate, so neither of us have right of way- you go!" "I agree, now you go ahead!"Long Con wrote:Well, the thing is, when you're trying to catch the bad guys, it really hinders the strategy when you blurt all your thoughts into the thread right away so that they can read and adapt to what you say. I don't want my suspects taking my thoughts into account when they are posting, because then they could post with the right kind of foreknowledge, saying the things that I so generously supplied the means to say that will make me not suspect them.
Like, I could say "I'm suspicious of the player who goes after Llama today"... and if I said that before you had posted, then maybe you, as a hypothetical baddie, would have posted something different than you did, and my suspicion would be cut off at its base.
I hope this helps you understand why I, in this game and future games, might be inclined to hold back thoughts I have from the thread.
Epignosis wrote:If llama is good, it means we exist in a universe in which multitasking llama can call out the first of two mafia while simultaneously calling out two civilians.
I don't want to live in that universe.
Sorry, I thought I specified. I wanted to give him more of a chance because I watched him get lynched Day 1 in Tree Mafia as the cop. You know what, I think I did explain this. Next thing I said was "ironically, I would have voted for Dr. Wilgy, instead" because I'm a nub like that. Doing a bit more reading, but I'll probably have a few more posts soon.Scotty wrote:Draconus, for finding Enrique suspicious, but would be willing to let him go another day. Why not follow through on your convictions?
Are these your real or fake thoughtsLong Con wrote:Ok, fair enough. 24-hour days and thread silence doesn't work for that line of thinking, that's true. I think that the Mafia deliberately didn't kill anyone in order to lead us on a wild goose chase against low posters.
I also think that DrWilgy "red peeked" Metalmarsh and voted for him. It's not the strategy that everyone would use, but I think it's logical enough for him to go after MM right away just in case he got nightkilled early, there would then be a record of his info played out in a Day 1 vote, if nothing else. So I'm going to vote Metalmarsh at this time.
Furthermore, it's likely that the other Wet Bandit would try to steer the thread away from focusing on MM, so your post that doesn't suspect him at all follows that logic. So you're my other main suspect at this time.
That's where I'm at right now.
I disagree with your first paragraph. It doesn't make sense to me to not use a NK in such a small game with only 2 baddies. Just my opinion, thoughLong Con wrote:Ok, fair enough. 24-hour days and thread silence doesn't work for that line of thinking, that's true. I think that the Mafia deliberately didn't kill anyone in order to lead us on a wild goose chase against low posters.
I also think that DrWilgy "red peeked" Metalmarsh and voted for him. It's not the strategy that everyone would use, but I think it's logical enough for him to go after MM right away just in case he got nightkilled early, there would then be a record of his info played out in a Day 1 vote, if nothing else. So I'm going to vote Metalmarsh at this time.
Furthermore, it's likely that the other Wet Bandit would try to steer the thread away from focusing on MM, so your post that doesn't suspect him at all follows that logic. So you're my other main suspect at this time.
That's where I'm at right now.
A little of both, actually.Elohcin wrote:Are these your real or fake thoughtsLong Con wrote:Ok, fair enough. 24-hour days and thread silence doesn't work for that line of thinking, that's true. I think that the Mafia deliberately didn't kill anyone in order to lead us on a wild goose chase against low posters.
I also think that DrWilgy "red peeked" Metalmarsh and voted for him. It's not the strategy that everyone would use, but I think it's logical enough for him to go after MM right away just in case he got nightkilled early, there would then be a record of his info played out in a Day 1 vote, if nothing else. So I'm going to vote Metalmarsh at this time.
Furthermore, it's likely that the other Wet Bandit would try to steer the thread away from focusing on MM, so your post that doesn't suspect him at all follows that logic. So you're my other main suspect at this time.
That's where I'm at right now.
I was a little busy Day 1 (mainly helping to get Smashfest ready, and watching football).Ricochet wrote:Yay @ no death! Good doctor is good, if that was the case.
The pool is way too large right now for an absent Mafia duo theory to hold (or, at least, be the main thing to pursue). Maybe if we catch one of the bandits and then the no activity indication reoccurs, with just one bandit out there. But as of now, you've got, in theory, DFaraday (inactive), sprityo (inactive, connectivity issues), Draconus (sporadic), Llama (infrequent) and Enrique (infrequent). That's half the current field.
What Scotty said is also true, it would take just one of the two bandits to send in a kill and it would also take just one log and PM during the Night phase to accomplish that (unless the bandits held off until the EoN and dun goof'd by not managing to be around).
With the field of inactives / low-posters being this big, I think, just like LC, that the mafia deliberately abstaining from a kill is a decent possibility.
Right now, I'm willing to vote Metalmarsh for two reasons:
one, to test if Wilgy red peek'd him (in fact, if a red D0 peek was even possible); now that he flipped cop, his sturdy vote posts seem indicative on fixating with good reason on MM and pointing out that, should MM flip bad, there will be "one" bandit left; even if that's not the case (his peek being true, I mean), Wilgy had a crazy sixth sense detecting Diiny as scum from the get go in Tree Mafia.
two, MM added some logic to his Llama re-vote today, unfortunately he did not offer any such logic yesterDay. Furthermore, he acted really laid-back from playing throughout D1 - I've seen him active on the forum many times, for that matter - instead of contributing (at least slightly) more to the discussions, so that we all might have perhaps reached a different outcome.
Dragon D. Luffy wrote: ↑Wed Dec 16, 2020 7:33 pm Just how many days of "let's yeet them tomorrow" can a mafioso survive?
The answer: all of them, if you are a marmot.
DrWilgy wrote:MM is my friend but we must duel to the death, so him
PULL
DrWilgy wrote:Lol, why did I ping? I am MM's friend this is true, but we must fight to the death for the greater good. Only one shall be left standing!
Yeah, he was the cop. But does this look like the attitude of a cop who knows they've nabbed a baddie?DrWilgy wrote:There can be only one.
Dragon D. Luffy wrote: ↑Wed Dec 16, 2020 7:33 pm Just how many days of "let's yeet them tomorrow" can a mafioso survive?
The answer: all of them, if you are a marmot.
I believe a larger pool would make the theory more probable.Ricochet wrote:The pool is way too large right now for an absent Mafia duo theory to hold (or, at least, be the main thing to pursue). Maybe if we catch one of the bandits and then the no activity indication reoccurs, with just one bandit out there. But as of now, you've got, in theory, DFaraday (inactive), sprityo (inactive, connectivity issues), Draconus (sporadic), Llama (infrequent) and Enrique (infrequent). That's half the current field.
Dragon D. Luffy wrote: ↑Wed Dec 16, 2020 7:33 pm Just how many days of "let's yeet them tomorrow" can a mafioso survive?
The answer: all of them, if you are a marmot.
It looks like a Wilgy who has found cause to go after a friend immediatelyMetalmarsh89 wrote:DrWilgy wrote:MM is my friend but we must duel to the death, so him
PULLDrWilgy wrote:Lol, why did I ping? I am MM's friend this is true, but we must fight to the death for the greater good. Only one shall be left standing!Yeah, he was the cop. But does this look like the attitude of a cop who knows they've nabbed a baddie?DrWilgy wrote:There can be only one.
Dragon D. Luffy wrote: ↑Wed Dec 16, 2020 7:33 pm Just how many days of "let's yeet them tomorrow" can a mafioso survive?
The answer: all of them, if you are a marmot.
I do not have a single-track mind (at least not all the time ), so I will be looking at other options today.Metalmarsh89 wrote:I implore you reconsider.
I know this is anti-civ, but as a civ who thinks you are a civ too, I kind-of want to lynch you for thisLong Con wrote:A little of both, actually.Elohcin wrote:Are these your real or fake thoughtsLong Con wrote:Ok, fair enough. 24-hour days and thread silence doesn't work for that line of thinking, that's true. I think that the Mafia deliberately didn't kill anyone in order to lead us on a wild goose chase against low posters.
I also think that DrWilgy "red peeked" Metalmarsh and voted for him. It's not the strategy that everyone would use, but I think it's logical enough for him to go after MM right away just in case he got nightkilled early, there would then be a record of his info played out in a Day 1 vote, if nothing else. So I'm going to vote Metalmarsh at this time.
Furthermore, it's likely that the other Wet Bandit would try to steer the thread away from focusing on MM, so your post that doesn't suspect him at all follows that logic. So you're my other main suspect at this time.
That's where I'm at right now.
Epignosis wrote:If llama is good, it means we exist in a universe in which multitasking llama can call out the first of two mafia while simultaneously calling out two civilians.
I don't want to live in that universe.
Ah ok, I'm sorry. All you said was "Tree Cop and all that", which means nothing to me. But thank you for explaining it further.Draconus wrote:Sorry, I thought I specified. I wanted to give him more of a chance because I watched him get lynched Day 1 in Tree Mafia as the cop. You know what, I think I did explain this. Next thing I said was "ironically, I would have voted for Dr. Wilgy, instead" because I'm a nub like that. Doing a bit more reading, but I'll probably have a few more posts soon.Scotty wrote:Draconus, for finding Enrique suspicious, but would be willing to let him go another day. Why not follow through on your convictions?
I never know whether you are lying or not, my man. I'd like to think you're just out to dry right now due to bad circumstances with Wilgy.Metalmarsh89 wrote:I believe a larger pool would make the theory more probable.Ricochet wrote:The pool is way too large right now for an absent Mafia duo theory to hold (or, at least, be the main thing to pursue). Maybe if we catch one of the bandits and then the no activity indication reoccurs, with just one bandit out there. But as of now, you've got, in theory, DFaraday (inactive), sprityo (inactive, connectivity issues), Draconus (sporadic), Llama (infrequent) and Enrique (infrequent). That's half the current field.
Aw, that's sweet, Eloh! Thanks!Elohcin wrote:I know this is anti-civ, but as a civ who thinks you are a civ too, I kind-of want to lynch you for thisLong Con wrote:A little of both, actually.Elohcin wrote:Are these your real or fake thoughtsLong Con wrote:Ok, fair enough. 24-hour days and thread silence doesn't work for that line of thinking, that's true. I think that the Mafia deliberately didn't kill anyone in order to lead us on a wild goose chase against low posters.
I also think that DrWilgy "red peeked" Metalmarsh and voted for him. It's not the strategy that everyone would use, but I think it's logical enough for him to go after MM right away just in case he got nightkilled early, there would then be a record of his info played out in a Day 1 vote, if nothing else. So I'm going to vote Metalmarsh at this time.
Furthermore, it's likely that the other Wet Bandit would try to steer the thread away from focusing on MM, so your post that doesn't suspect him at all follows that logic. So you're my other main suspect at this time.
That's where I'm at right now.
And thank you, Mr Llama. I'm really interested in exploring the use of deception as a Civ in order to coax Mafia into some sort of misplay. I think it gets a bit diluted when people focus too much on it, but hey, I'm just experimenting a little. From now on, I'll only post real thoughts.thellama73 wrote:I like the way Long Con is thinking this game. Good job, Long Con.
I see a bit of contradiction here. Wilgy made false statements to protect himself, but wasn't direct enough in his statements towards lynching you for the peek to be genuine. How would he have protected himself by going all out bark on you, wording and all? I think the insinuations in his statements were clear enough: only one [baddie] shall be left standing if we lynch you.Metalmarsh89 wrote:DrWilgy wrote:MM is my friend but we must duel to the death, so him
PULLDrWilgy wrote:Lol, why did I ping? I am MM's friend this is true, but we must fight to the death for the greater good. Only one shall be left standing!Yeah, he was the cop. But does this look like the attitude of a cop who knows they've nabbed a baddie?DrWilgy wrote:There can be only one.
No, I'm pretty sure that he was trying to protect himself from getting nightkilled by offering a false statement, and nothing else. Not once did DrWilgy state that I was mafia or scum or even a hoo ha. Note that "We must fight to the death for the greater good", not "You must die for the greater good" or something of the sort. The word selection is key here.
Long Con wrote:Aw, that's sweet, Eloh! Thanks!Elohcin wrote:I know this is anti-civ, but as a civ who thinks you are a civ too, I kind-of want to lynch you for thisLong Con wrote:A little of both, actually.Elohcin wrote:Are these your real or fake thoughtsLong Con wrote:Ok, fair enough. 24-hour days and thread silence doesn't work for that line of thinking, that's true. I think that the Mafia deliberately didn't kill anyone in order to lead us on a wild goose chase against low posters.
I also think that DrWilgy "red peeked" Metalmarsh and voted for him. It's not the strategy that everyone would use, but I think it's logical enough for him to go after MM right away just in case he got nightkilled early, there would then be a record of his info played out in a Day 1 vote, if nothing else. So I'm going to vote Metalmarsh at this time.
Furthermore, it's likely that the other Wet Bandit would try to steer the thread away from focusing on MM, so your post that doesn't suspect him at all follows that logic. So you're my other main suspect at this time.
That's where I'm at right now.
And thank you, Mr Llama. I'm really interested in exploring the use of deception as a Civ in order to coax Mafia into some sort of misplay. I think it gets a bit diluted when people focus too much on it, but hey, I'm just experimenting a little. From now on, I'll only post real thoughts.thellama73 wrote:I like the way Long Con is thinking this game. Good job, Long Con.
Yeah sorry for being so vague. I really don't know. I didn't pay too much attention to what was being said. I paid more attention to the lynch/night results (I didn't participate in that game).Scotty wrote:Ah ok, I'm sorry. All you said was "Tree Cop and all that", which means nothing to me. But thank you for explaining it further.Draconus wrote:Sorry, I thought I specified. I wanted to give him more of a chance because I watched him get lynched Day 1 in Tree Mafia as the cop. You know what, I think I did explain this. Next thing I said was "ironically, I would have voted for Dr. Wilgy, instead" because I'm a nub like that. Doing a bit more reading, but I'll probably have a few more posts soon.Scotty wrote:Draconus, for finding Enrique suspicious, but would be willing to let him go another day. Why not follow through on your convictions?
So would you say that Enrique is acting the same he did in Tree Mafia, or is it just a principle thing that is holding you back from voting him day 1 again?
Epignosis wrote:If llama is good, it means we exist in a universe in which multitasking llama can call out the first of two mafia while simultaneously calling out two civilians.
I don't want to live in that universe.
Epignosis wrote:If llama is good, it means we exist in a universe in which multitasking llama can call out the first of two mafia while simultaneously calling out two civilians.
I don't want to live in that universe.
But... you do know me... Devin the Omniscient at your service :bows:thellama73 wrote:Draconus, I don't know you. What's your deal?
In answering this question, please be thorough, yet concise. Marks will be given out of ten.
What makes you think this?thellama73 wrote:I also want to state on the record that I think MM is unlikely to yield a baddie, and I will be looking at his voters with extreme suspicion if he gets lynched and I am right.
Hi Devin. Why did you change your screen name?Draconus wrote:But... you do know me... Devin the Omniscient at your service :bows:thellama73 wrote:Draconus, I don't know you. What's your deal?
In answering this question, please be thorough, yet concise. Marks will be given out of ten.
What makes you think this?thellama73 wrote:I also want to state on the record that I think MM is unlikely to yield a baddie, and I will be looking at his voters with extreme suspicion if he gets lynched and I am right.
Epignosis wrote:If llama is good, it means we exist in a universe in which multitasking llama can call out the first of two mafia while simultaneously calling out two civilians.
I don't want to live in that universe.
Hi llama. I did this after Talking Heads. I just got tired of the old name. Draconus is a name I've used for awhile now across many other platforms, so I thought I'd introduce it here.thellama73 wrote:Hi Devin. Why did you change your screen name?Draconus wrote:But... you do know me... Devin the Omniscient at your service :bows:thellama73 wrote:Draconus, I don't know you. What's your deal?
In answering this question, please be thorough, yet concise. Marks will be given out of ten.
What makes you think this?thellama73 wrote:I also want to state on the record that I think MM is unlikely to yield a baddie, and I will be looking at his voters with extreme suspicion if he gets lynched and I am right.
I don't think baddie MM would come out gunning for me on Day 1 with no provocation. It's not his style. He would be more subtle.
Well, I'm unlikely to change my vote this time. But I don't think it's me that you'd be looking at suspiciously.thellama73 wrote:I also want to state on the record that I think MM is unlikely to yield a baddie, and I will be looking at his voters with extreme suspicion if he gets lynched and I am right.
Not at this time.Long Con wrote:Well, I'm unlikely to change my vote this time. But I don't think it's me that you'd be looking at suspiciously.thellama73 wrote:I also want to state on the record that I think MM is unlikely to yield a baddie, and I will be looking at his voters with extreme suspicion if he gets lynched and I am right.
Epignosis wrote:If llama is good, it means we exist in a universe in which multitasking llama can call out the first of two mafia while simultaneously calling out two civilians.
I don't want to live in that universe.
I really should have followed throughLong Con wrote:You were such a tease when you said you were thinking about voting Dom with S~V~S. Could have been a different endgame!
lolthellama73 wrote:Draconus, I don't know you. What's your deal?
That is hardly the main issue concerning MM (although, for me personally, his loose D1 vote is indeed a partial issue as well).thellama73 wrote:
I don't think baddie MM would come out gunning for me on Day 1 with no provocation. It's not his style. He would be more subtle.